I don't understand what this has to do with our discussion. No one is debating whether Apple makes more per device (they do) or whether developers make more (they do) because Apple users buy more paid apps (they do) than Android users. Apple's entire business model is based on selling devices with high margin (expensive for consumers and cell carriers) and roping them into the eco-system. Again, we agree on these points.

The discussion is about who is "winning". Let's take a step back and discuss what the benefit of "winning" is. As a consumer, I don't give two licks about how much money these companies make.

What I want is the best device with the best features.

So when we look at what it means to "win" what we are looking at is what is going to result in the most benefit for me, the end user.

• We want to know that the platform we are buying into is healthy and will continue to get great support.

• We want to know that a steady stream of high quality apps will be written for our platform.

• We want to know that our devices will be popular enough to be compatible with after market products and accessories.

• We want to know that our devices will be popular enough to be compatible with 3rd party software.

These are the ways having a good marketshare benefits the consumer. And in all of these cases, both platforms are in good shape.

I would argue that on all of these points, apple is in better shape as a platform than android is. If I am forgetting anything, please let me know.

How does the larger marketshare of android benefit your average user on the street? Is the larger marketshare providing tangible consumer benefit over what iOS offers?

Quote:

Apple is great at innovation, but as a company they must continue to innovate or else lose to the competition in market share and tech specs. See the iPhone for how this is happening. I believe the same is happening with the iPad although we are still in early days. iPad dominance will continue for another 2-3 years and then competitors will begin to take over.

You keep saying this, but I don't think it meshes with reality. Apple is selling more and more iPhones every year. Their growth is insane and they are making tons and tons of money in the mobile market. They are the very model of health in the business world. They are in a way way better position than Google or Microsoft. Google has yet to make a dime of actual profit off Android. The entire platform is designed to move advertising, and yet, they make 4 times as much advertising revenue from iOS. The only Android hardware manufacturer making any money is Samsung. HTC, Motorola, Sony... all losing buckets of cash. Posting loss after loss. Microsoft and Nokia are just a huge mess. RIM is basically dead. Any of these companies would trade places with Apple in a heartbeat.

To put this into some more perspective. Apple's iPhone, which represents about half of their revenue, makes more money than all of Microsoft. Apple's iPhone all by itself also makes more money than all of Google. It also continues to make more and more every single year. There is no indication that it is going to be slowing down.

Anyway... In the end what consumers want is multiple platforms with healthy ecosystems. Competition benefits everyone. There doesn't need to be a winner and loser, and their probably won't be. Hopefully we will see multiple platforms thrive and compete. That's what benefits the consumer most of all.

I can see how someone can look at apple 's products and decide that they aren't for them. Android phones are great and offer a lot of features that iPhones don't.

I just don't see how that frequently turns into apple users being dumb or apple the company being in trouble.

I think when people talk about apple being in trouble, or apple losing, they are just projecting their hatred for the company into their feelings. For whatever reason, apple doing well drives non-apple users insane. They just can't handle it and they start crafting all sorts of bizarre fantasy scenarios to make it feel like apple is doing worse than they are, or their platform of choice is going to win.

No one needs to win. If anyone does win, we all lose.

Quote:

What this has to do with Tivo is that Tivo should not continue their current strategy of prioritizing Apple devices since the Android ecosystem has surpassed iOS. Hopefully, Tivo leadership has learned this lesson. If in the future, another competitor (Windows or a new OS) begins to gain market share Tivo should not ignore it but should adapt to the changing reality of the cell phone, tablet, or other device market.

Again, Android has raw numbers, but a huge amount of those phones are in the hands of people who don't use them as smartphones. iOS users download more apps and use them more. Despite being in the minority marketshare wise. The numbers here aren't even close. Apple is an easier platform to target, because there are much less devices to optimize for. iOS users download more apps and pay for more apps. In the tablet market, the real target of the Stream, the iPad is clearly ahead by a huge margin by any measurable metric.

If TiVo had to make a choice between getting it out now on one platform, or trying to make it for every platform, iOS is the safe and logical choice.

Even if they made the Android app first, they wouldn't be able to target every android device, making android larger marketshare a moot point anyway.

I see comments all over the web like this and I never bother responding... so in the rare instance when I do respond, I do it thoroughly.

This is more of a response to the last 100 people who have said something similar, only poor mr smits gets the brunt of it, because he caught me on a quiet morning at work (where I can spare 15 minutes to write a long response) and on a commenting system where I am actually registered and logged in.

I see comments all over the web like this and I never bother responding... so in the rare instance when I do respond, I do it thoroughly.

This is more of a response to the last 100 people who have said something similar, only poor mr smits gets the brunt of it, because he caught me on a quiet morning at work (where I can spare 15 minutes to write a long response) and on a commenting system where I am actually registered and logged in.

Ya but this thread really has very little to do with ios devices and the people who use them per say and allot to do with people who want to use the stream with non-ios devices.

It is really simple when people want something, some people are willing to do or say anything to get it. Just look at the crap people say to get people to vote one way or the other truth/reality has nothing to do with it.

In this case people with non-ios devices want the stream to work with their device. So any position that justifies TiVo doing that is a good position. So no real reason to take it personally.

Well, mr_smits was saying that it made more sense for TiVo to make the android version first, and I'm trying to explain why I think that's not the case.

TiVo should (and will) make it work for everyone. But it makes more sense for them to get it out on one platform, and then bring access for more people later, than it is for them to sit on it until it works across both platforms. It also makes more sense for them to make the lead platform iOS.

Well, mr_smits was saying that it made more sense for TiVo to make the android version first, and I'm trying to explain why I think that's not the case.

TiVo should (and will) make it work for everyone. But it makes more sense for them to get it out on one platform, and then bring access for more people later, than it is for them to sit on it until it works across both platforms. It also makes more sense for them to make the lead platform iOS.

Instead of responding to your entire other post, I'll just focus on this one issue:

I disagree that Tivo choosing iOS was the safe and logical choice for Stream compatibility. It would have been the safe and logical choice in 2009, but it’s almost 2013 and the reality is that the market is changing rapidly. According to this Engadget article, http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/25/s...nt-of-tablets/ iPad is about 57% percent of the tablet market with Android tablets at 41%!

I don't think Tivo should have made the Android app first; in fact, that would have been just as bad as iOS first decision. Tivo is supposed to be known as making TV simple and just working for the majority of potential customers. The iOS and Android apps should be developed simultaneously and released at the same time. If Tivo wants to thrive, it should stay on top of market share trends and not default to one. It's a poor business to do otherwise.

It would be great to hear from an official Tivo spokesperson that an Android version or compatibility was started at the same time and with the same resources (money, vigor) as the iOS version was, because I don't believe that it is true. It may be easier to create for iOS and that is why that decision was made, but when has taking the easy route been the best route? I'd argue very rarely.

Instead of responding to your entire other post, I'll just focus on this one issue:

I disagree that Tivo choosing iOS was the safe and logical choice for Stream compatibility. It would have been the safe and logical choice in 2009, but it’s almost 2013 and the reality is that the market is changing rapidly. According to this Engadget article, http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/25/s...nt-of-tablets/ iPad is about 57% percent of the tablet market with Android tablets at 41%!

I don't think Tivo should have made the Android app first; in fact, that would have been just as bad as iOS first decision. Tivo is supposed to be known as making TV simple and just working for the majority of potential customers. The iOS and Android apps should be developed simultaneously and released at the same time. If Tivo wants to thrive, it should stay on top of market share trends and not default to one. It's a poor business to do otherwise.

It would be great to hear from an official Tivo spokesperson that an Android version or compatibility was started at the same time and with the same resources (money, vigor) as the iOS version was, because I don't believe that it is true. It may be easier to create for iOS and that is why that decision was made, but when has taking the easy route been the best route? I'd argue very rarely.

Those tablet numbers don't really correlate to real world use. That's tablet shipment in one quarter. Apple lists tablet sales numbers while none of the competition does. Apple has sold 100 million iPads. To put that into perspective, the PS2, the most popular gaming console in history, sold 150 million units in 10 years. The iPad has sold 100 million units in 2.5 years.

Anytime there are studies about browser usage amongst tablets, the iPad is in the low 90%s.

I think you're just sticking your head in the sand. No one makes the android version of their apps first. Everyone makes the iOS version first and then ports it to android. There is a reason they do this.

Look at the link again. Market share is below the shipments in Q3 2011 and Q3 2012. The one that says Global Market Share. Is it so difficult for you to acknowledge that the iPad and iPhone isn't "winning" that you simply cannot see data that contradicts your opinion?

Tivo should respond to the facts: market share and market share trends. Hopefully the leadership that made the Stream decision to go iOS first instead of at least having Android and iOS support at launch has been fired or demoted to a position some easier decision making.

Those numbers are estimates because none of the companies release any data.

Even if they are accurate, and Android is holding 40% of the tablet market. Those numbers are split up amongst dozens of tablets. Do you spend the time and energy coding and testing for each of those tablets, each of which has a tiny sliver of the total market, or do you take the easy route, and code for the iPad, which takes less time, costs less money and hits more users.

If TiVo is making a mistake by ignoring market trends then they aren't alone, because almost everybody targets iOS first.

iOS is the lead mobile platform. It's where developers go first. And they do it for a reason.

Maybe every single developer and company who is making iOS apps first is completely wrong, and simply isn't privy to the inside information you have, but somehow I don't think that is the case.

They go where the active users and money is... and that's iOS.

That's what's happening. Thinking it shouldn't work that way won't change it.

It's also worth considering demographics. TiVo customers (and potential tivo customers) are not "the world". They're largely American, so the extremely large number of android tablets sold in Asia are irrelevant. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that tivo households with tablets and money to drop on a stream are probably higher income as well - research I've seen puts iOS usage much higher in higher income brackets.

That said, I agree with the sentiment that only a healthy competition benefits consumers. Long live iOS and android

It's attitudes like this that put apple users in a defensive stance. Must people use terms like sheeple? Status symbol? Mother apple?

Well, at the very least, it makes for a more interesting spectacle here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ort

You are insulting people directly when you do this.

'Something I learned more than 40 years ago: It is impossible to insult someone who refuses to be insulted. A thick skin and a sense of humor do far, far more to weather a verbally abusive onslaught than any amount of protest or attempted retribution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ort

I think anyone who feels the need to belittle or insult people over their choice of electronics is probably a small minded person with severe emotional problems.

Case in point. No offense intended, but that was an awfully feeble come-back. Providing some sort of evidence that Apple users were not "sheeple" would have been much more effective.

With qualifications, I agree. What I am looking for is the best value. That means it meets my needs for the lowest relative cost. I don't mind paying more for something that meets my needs compared with something that does not, but I don't want to pay more for something that exceeds my needs if a less expensive option meets them. In my book, the widely vaunted "exceeds expectations" is worthless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ort

So when we look at what it means to "win" what we are looking at is what is going to result in the most benefit for me, the end user.

Agreed, but...

Quote:

Originally Posted by ort

• We want to know that the platform we are buying into is healthy and will continue to get great support.

Disagreed. I very frequently buy last generation / abandoned technology. I can get it at a very good price, and if it meets my needs, paying more for a next generation technology is usually just foolish. The terms "innovation" and "continued development" rarely impress me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ort

• We want to know that a steady stream of high quality apps will be written for our platform.

Again, I disagree. Only very rarely have I been impressed by a new application. When I am, I will agree that its working on an existing or preferably mature platform is a plus. Note the "mature" qualification. I have a large amount of hardware in use that is over 20 years old. I haven't purchased a new PC in almost 10 years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ort

• We want to know that our devices will be popular enough to be compatible with after market products and accessories.

Being popular is less conducive to that end than being standards-based.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ort

• We want to know that our devices will be popular enough to be compatible with 3rd party software.

Being popular is not all that relevant to that end, while being standards-based is virtually a guarantee to that end. Of course, being both is a grand slam.

That said, I agree with the sentiment that only a healthy competition benefits consumers. Long live iOS and android

Yes, and to that end, as well as lots of other positive ones, no one should be impressed by an 80% or 90% market share of anything. They should be appalled. A much better situation all the way around is a host of companies, none of whom has more than 10%.

Well, at the very least, it makes for a more interesting spectacle here.

'Something I learned more than 40 years ago: It is impossible to insult someone who refuses to be insulted. A thick skin and a sense of humor do far, far more to weather a verbally abusive onslaught than any amount of protest or attempted retribution.

Case in point. No offense intended, but that was an awfully feeble come-back. Providing some sort of evidence that Apple users were not "sheeple" would have been much more effective.

I'm not going to take the time to try and convince you that apple users are not "sheeple". It's completely pointless.

When people say "sheeple" or refer to others as "sheep" what they really mean is "someone who made a different decision than they did".

It's a stupid phrase, regardless of who it is directed at. I've seen it used to describe all sorts of different people.

It runs on the assumption that everyone who isn't YOU, and came to the exact same conclusions as YOU, is a mindless moron who can't think rationally.

It's just a lazy, ugly phrase, and it comes from a bad place of the human psyche. It's divisive and belittling.

I'm not going to take the time to try and convince you that apple users are not "sheeple". It's completely pointless.

When people say "sheeple" or refer to others as "sheep" what they really mean is "someone who made a different decision than they did".

It's a stupid phrase, regardless of who it is directed at. I've seen it used to describe all sorts of different people.

It runs on the assumption that everyone who isn't YOU, and came to the exact same conclusions as YOU, is a mindless moron who can't think rationally.

It's just a lazy, ugly phrase, and it comes from a bad place of the human psyche. It's divisive and belittling.

I disagree.

People constantly need to be reminded to think for themselves, not necessarily follow the crowd, and to figure out what is in their own actually best interests instead of blindly believing other people.

If calling people sheeple, dumb a**es, or anything else accomplishes that then it is justified.

While it may have little negative effects on others when corporations successfully turn people into sheeple, there are significant negative effects when tyrants like Hitler or Osama Bin Laden do.

Then of course calling people sheeple may just be an attempt to turn them into sheeple of another stripe. Samsung's recent anti-apple commercial is doing that and the tactic is often used in politics.

On the topic of if Apple's customers are sheeple or not, I am fairly certain most are not. However if someone isn't making anything from camping out in front of an apple store just to replace the iphone they camped out to get last year with a new one, I am guessing they are.

People constantly need to be reminded to think for themselves, not necessarily follow the crowd, and to figure out what is in their own actually best interests instead of blindly believing other people.

If calling people sheeple, dumb a**es, or anything else accomplishes that then it is justified.

While it may have little negative effects on others when corporations successfully turn people into sheeple, there are significant negative effects when tyrants like Hitler or Osama Bin Laden do.

Then of course calling people sheeple may just be an attempt to turn them into sheeple of another stripe. Samsung's recent anti-apple commercial is doing that and the tactic is often used in politics.

On the topic of if Apple's customers are sheeple or not, I am fairly certain most are not. However if someone isn't making anything from camping out in front of an apple store just to replace the iphone they camped out to get last year with a new one, I am guessing they are.

It's funny, but 99% of the time, when one person is telling someone else they need to think for themselves, what they are really saying is, "You need to think like me."

It's funny, but 99% of the time, when one person is telling someone else they need to think for themselves, what they are really saying is, "You need to think like me."

I agree there are plenty of people who try to use telling someone to "think for themselves" as a back door why of telling them what to think/do/buy. That is just part of the game of marketing what ever is being marketed.

Regardless it is still in a person's best interest to actually "think" whatever through and make a decision that they at least believe is in their best interest based on an analysis of the information available, instead of blindly buying into the marketing hype. Of course because we don't know what we don't know any decision can end up not being the optimal one. In hind site I would say many decisions I have made are not optimal even though I normally try to make as informed a decision as possible.

Just for the record my definition of a sheeple = someone who blindly buys into the marketing hype of whatever is being marketed. They follow the crowd without any real thought as to why and are easily manipulated into doing/believing things that are not necessarily in their best interest.

Iphone is nowhere in the corporate world except for 'BYOD' which is dead on arrival in any organization that has data security issues.

I know plenty of organizations that give out only iPhones because they are much more secure and easy to manage over Android devices... Think about it: every iPhone and iPad run a 100% identical OS, it's always the same. A breeze to manage, but with Android, there are many different versions of the OS, PLUS the crap GUI that all the manufacturers force on them, hundreds of combinations. I think most companies prefer iOS due to that one fact.

I know plenty of organizations that give out only iPhones because they are much more secure and easy to manage over Android devices... Think about it: every iPhone and iPad run a 100% identical OS, it's always the same. A breeze to manage, but with Android, there are many different versions of the OS, PLUS the crap GUI that all the manufacturers force on them, hundreds of combinations. I think most companies prefer iOS due to that one fact.

Our company was 100% berry; its probably 95% iphone now. We use global iron to tie things down. Corporate is huge for apple now.

Android is fragmented like you say; we had issues with certain manufacturers email clients not even supporting certain active sync policy.

Corporate use of Android does not use the manufacturers email clients. Secure email requires a secure client. Our company and many that we deal with in the Energy sector and medical sector use a client called Touchdown.

Just like for PCs, every corporate android we issue runs the same os and software load There is NO fragmentation. Try getting apple to do that.

__________________
Current : Roamio Base with 2TB drive and 2 Premieres and a mini. OTA. kmttg, pyTivo, running with a 78TB Synology 1511 NAS....serving up the world.

Setup help for pytivo under windows: To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.